Explain to me how you self-host a git repo which is accessed millions of time a day from CI jobs pulling packages.
I've looked into self hosting and git repo that has horizontal scalability, and it is indeed very difficult. I don't have the time to detail it in a comment here, but for anyone who is curious it's very informative to look at how GitLab handled this with gitaly. I've also seen some clever attempts to use object storage, though I haven't seen any of those solutions put heavily to the test.
I'd love to hear from others about ideas and approaches they've heard about or tried
It's a very hacky feeling addon that RKE2 has a distributed internal registry if you enable it and use it in a very specific way.
For the rate at which people love just shipping a Helm chart, it's actually absurdly hard to ship a self contained installation without just trying to hit internet resources.
Explain to me how you self-host a git repo without spending any money and having no budget which is accessed millions of time a day from CI jobs pulling packages.
From compute POV you can serve that with one server or virtual machine.
Bandwidth-wise, given a 100 MB repo size, that would make it 3.4 GB/s - also easy terrain for a single server.
The git transport protocol is "smart" in a way that is, in some ways, arguably rather dumb. It's certainly expensive on the server side. All of the smartness of it is aimed at reducing the amount of transfer and number of connections. But to do that, it shifts a considerable amount of work onto the server in choosing which objects to provide you.
If you benchmark the resource loads of this, you probably won't be saying a single server is such an easy win :)
Using the slowest clone method they measured 8s for a 750 MB repo, 0.45s for a 40MB repo. appears to be linear so 1.1s for 100MB should be a valid interpolation.
So doing 30 of those per second only takes 33 cores. Servers have hundreds of cores now (eg 384 cores: https://www.phoronix.com/review/amd-epyc-9965-linux-619).
And remember we're using worst case assumptions in places (using the slowest clone method, and numbers from old hardware). In practice I'd bet a fastish laptop would suffice.
edit: actually on closer look at the github reported numbers the interpolation isn't straightforward: on the bigger 750MB repo the partial clone is actually said to be slower then the base full clone. However this doesn't change the big picture that it'll easily fit on one server.